User talk:RexxS/Archive 15

French Navy - Marine Nationale 90 (MN90) decompression tables
RexxS, If you get a few minutes for the Decompression (diving) article... Could you please expand some on the Marine Nationale 90 tables to replace the "citation needed" tag. I don't speak French and noticed you do. This reference should be a good one. (If you like it, I'll request an English translation). Thanks --Gene Hobbs (talk) 16:07, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
 * RexxS, I have used the reference to write up a section on the MN90 tables, using Google translate, my own vestigial understanding of French, and a lot of intuition/background knowledge/guesswork. I would appreciate if you would take a look and make sure I haven't made any obvious errors. Cheers, Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:24, 25 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Peter for that. My French is far more conversational than technical, but it certainly seems to me that you've made a good job of the translations from the source. I've tweaked the text to try to turn fragments into sentences, and to explain the GERS acronym, but otherwise I'm sure it's fine. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 23:35, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

:File:William Congreve.png
Public Domain or not, I requested CSD F4 because there is no source. Who took the photo of the art, or who made the art, etc, etc. I guess I need some more understanding about why it is required to have source on some images, but not on others. Thanks for your time. -- Тимофей ЛееСуда . 02:41, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, how do you know that the artwork is over 100 years old or sufficient enough to be PD? It is not uncommon for art to be recreated years, decades or centuries of iconic persons after they have passed. I just don't feel comfortable with out a source.  Sorry. -- Тимофей ЛееСуда .  02:44, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I've replied at User talk:ТимофейЛееСуда. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 03:21, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The information on the specific image does help, yes. But, I completely understand the justification of PD of photos taken of 2d art. I also understand that it defers to the copyright of the original image. I just stick with the idea that I am an average person and if I cannot easily see the proof that it is PD (ie knowing for sure that the original artwork is in fact out of copyright), I feel that others may not be able to either.  I applaud your and Nikkimaria's work and knowledge of the art.  It seems to me that my original CSD F4 request was pertinent in needing a source, and now it has one that anyone can see and understand is PD.  I see that this is why there is a 7-day time before deletion, but I hope that you understand my desire for sources for the common folk. Thanks for your assistance in this matter.-- Тимофей ЛееСуда .  03:43, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Discussion of football squad templates, re accessibility
Hello, and sorry to bother you. There's an ongoing discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football about the replacement of the existing widely used Football squad player family of templates by the wikitable-like Football squad player2 family (or possibly something similar to the less widely used flag-compliant version example at Boca Juniors squad), partly to comply with MOS:FLAG and partly on accessibility grounds. I wonder if you might possibly find time to have a look at the discussion, and if there's anything you could add or clarify on questions of accessibility, your input would be appreciated. I'm afraid the discussion does ramble on a bit..... cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:29, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay, that's a huge discussion. I've skimmed over it, but I wouldn't know where to start in making an input. There are so many confused ideas there that I suspect it will take a very long time before any consensus could be reached. None of the templates I've looked at meet the requirements of WP:DTAB, as they all lack scope markup for column and row headers, and few of the editors working on football articles seem to have a grasp of why we do that. I'd recommend stepping away from that mess and working with WFC to get one list through FLC. I'd be happy to help with that, if you wanted. That would give you some leverage to show what is accepted as best practice, and you'd be able to revisit the debate later, in a stronger position to persuade others to sacrifice some of their visual aesthetics for an increase in accessibility for the disadvantaged. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 03:35, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking the trouble to look at it at all. Thing is, the specific focus of the problem was on the template(s) used in the current squad section of football club articles: the template became problematic in the very first place because one such article was failing FAC (on MOS:FLAG violation, not more general accessibility issues). I can't think of anything list-y that would help, all-time roster lists etc already use wikitables with scope markup for rows and columns, and have done for some time. Thanks again for having a look: wish I'd asked you sooner, before it got so confusing and confused. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 22:26, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Discog key
Hey RexxS, many of the discog tables have a "key" at the end which simply explains what an en-dash means (usually that a release wasn't made in a particular territory or didn't chart). User:Goodraise has noted that if this "key" doesn't appear until the end of the table, it's not actually very useful. My gut instinct is that we'd need some kind of alt text with the en-dashes, or a key before each table. It's with particular regard to the Eric B. & Rakim discography FLC. As ever, your input is much appreciated and respected. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:08, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi TRM, to be honest, that's such an overwhelmingly common use of the endash (or any sort of dash) in tables, both inside and outside of Wikipedia, that I'd have very little doubt that visitors would understand the meaning. The key is probably "icing on the cake" in that respect. Whenever we want to make sure that the meaning is understood, a good recommendation is to put the key before the main table, but this isn't one of those cases where I think it would make much difference. I'll drop a note into the FLC. --RexxS (talk) 21:26, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Isobaric counterdiffusion
Hi RexxS, Your comment in Decompression (diving): "But there's another mechanism at work that confounds that simple explanation. The solubility of nitrogen is 150% that of helium in water and 450% that of helium in lipids. This means that despite the different diffusion rates, an isobaric He -> N2 switch can temporarily increase the *total* inert gas load beyond the critical level and produce bubbles. You have to remember in mixed-gas diving that it's the total gas load that counts. There's a worked example at http://www.scubaengineer.com/isobaric_counter_diffusion.htm - not a great source (!) but there's little doubt that the effect is observed regularly. Delete me when finished :) "


 * I have a problem with using this part of the reference as I don't follow the argument. That means I can't paraphrase an explanation. I don't see the relevance of the differences in solubility in different tissue types. the only way I could see this working is if the same physical tissue has a different time constant for ingassing vs outgassing or for the different gases, which, though quite plausible, is not mentioned in the text as far as I can see, so would constitute OR, synthesis or speculation. The example appears to be assuming instantaneous equilibration for a start, and secondly, the calculated values are both saturation values at that pressure, and therefore unlikely to cause bubble formation. Thirdly, they appear to be amounts, not partial pressures/tensions. Unless I am seriously misanderstanding the logic, there isnt any. Cheers, Peter (Southwood) (talk): 08:09, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, as Gene once said to me, we don't understand the actual mechanism of any type of DCS, we just know that it's something to do with bubbles. Explanations are all speculation, it's just that the commoner types have had more speculation about them. Here's what I think we know about ICD:
 * The symptoms of ICD when switching from a helium-rich, nitrogen-lean mix to a helium-lean, nitrogen-rich mix during a deco stop are well reported.
 * It's often manifested in the inner ear - vertigo, nausea, vomiting.
 * Its onset is quick.
 * Taking the last two together points to a fast-tissue hit. The differential diffusion rates of He and N2 can't explain this. However, blood actually does equilibrate almost instantaneously (within seconds) when passing through the lungs, and that's why I quoted the solubilities: nitrogen is somewhere between 150% and 450% more soluble in blood and fast tissues than helium. So if we arrive a medium-deep deco stop on a helium-rich mixture, we will be almost at a critical level of saturation for helium, and it takes something in the order of minutes to unload the controlling tissue sufficiently to ascend as far as the next stop. However, after the gas switch, the helium is coming out of the slower tissues into the faster tissues, while nitrogen is loading the blood and then the fast tissues in the time it takes blood to move from the lungs to the ear (in particular). The amount of nitrogen able to be dissolved into the tissue will be greater than the amount of helium able to be dissolved by a factor of possibly as much as 4. The point where the ICD occurs in this scenario seems to occur when the total inert gas load exceeds a critical value - and it does. I mean that if a tissue can dissolve x amount of helium in the absence of other gases, it can only dissolve less than x in the presence of other inert gases; they interact and many of our theoretical models don't take this into account properly. Stephen Burton's calculation is indeed simplified, but as long as the time taken to saturate the blood with the nitrogen in the lungs is rather less than the time it takes for slower tissues surrounding the ear to lose helium into it, the total gas loading to the ear will increase in the way he states.
 * I assume it's the same sort of effect that we observe when first giving 100% O2 to a casualty with joint pains; it's often reported that the symptoms transiently worsen before improving.
 * Nevertheless, I do accept that the mechanism I'm describing is not well described in the good quality sources. The best is by David Doolette and Simon Mitchell. I see that the full text is now available at http://jap.physiology.org/content/94/6/2145.long so it's probably worth reading that in full, as you may find it matches my commentary sufficiently well for you to be able to write something for the article. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 18:09, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Doolette and Mitchell make much more sense. A model doesn't have to be true, but it should be plausible and give plausible results. If it is just a curve fit or a kludge it is fine to say so, but not good to pretend it is something else. Anyway, I have put in a bit from D&M, and the Burton advice, as that is claimed to be effective in practice, but I am not going to try to explain how he gets it as it looks to me like he has left something out.
 * Is there anything else you can spot that is missing from the article, or anything that needs more explanation? I never know just how much explanation is necessary, and it is less work to underdo it and wait for someone to ask for more. Some nice photos would be great, but I don't have any. However if there is any reasonable graphic that would help I can have a go at it. Cheers, Peter (Southwood) (talk): 20:09, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

WikiAudit
Hi RexxS,

I thought you might be interested to know about WikiAudit. It's a new tool for finding out stuff about IP addresses in ranges, from the maker of STiki.

Yaris678 (talk) 21:24, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Hey Yaris - good to see you again yesterday and sorry I didn't find more time to chat. I had a look at that tool and it certainly seems useful for examining IP contributions, so I'll get a copy for future use. Thanks --RexxS (talk) 17:06, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Notability of Don Shirley (diver)
Hi RexxS, Could you take a look at Don Shirley (diver). I dont think notability has been established, but another user does. Also there is a provocative quote from the only secondary source and I am unsure of how to deal with it. Cheers, Peter (Southwood) (talk): 07:22, 10 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Peter, sorry I've not replied sooner, but I've been taking a three week wiki-break as I was feeling rather jaded with the place, and I've found that a short break helps to revive my enthusiasm. I've done a little clean-up at Don Shirley and commented on the talk page. In brief, I think that an argument could be made for the notability either way, and more sources are really needed. The purpose of the tag is to attract other editors, so if nobody else shows up to add to the discussion, I'd recommend removing it after a while, but you should use your own judgement on that. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 17:06, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

WikiMeet
Evening! Pleasure to see you again today, here's the link if you need it - User:SalopianJames/Sandbox/Central A-class proposal. SalopianJames (talk) 20:35, 19 February 2012 (UTC)


 * What? Meeting in real-life to embiggen the wiki?
 * User talk:Alarbus
 * You might be interested in this idea by Maunus. Alarbus (talk) 04:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hehe - I already have the T-shirt for the idea, but it's well worthwhile pursuing. The concept of spreading existing A-class expertise to multiple other wikiprojects makes eminent sense, and ought to help fill that gap between GA and FA while hopefully reducing the load on FA reviewers by having much better prepared articles nominated. I'm on a busy schedule of wiki-meets (as you can see below). Maybe I should make a userbox something like this:

This user believes that meeting other editors in the flesh makes it far less likely that they will be treated like a pile of dogshit online.
 * Any takers? --RexxS (talk) 17:06, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

hlist
Good to met you - twice! - this weekend. I've only now made the connection between you and hlist implementation. Had I realised, I would have bought you a pint! Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:00, 20 February 2012 (UTC)
 * We'll meet up again soon; I'm sure of that - maybe Meetup/Monmouth/1? or the next Coventry? I'll make sure I get to buy you a pint as well ;) Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 19:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

List of National Historic Landmarks in Michigan FLC
Hi RexxS - I think that all of your comments at Featured list candidates/List of National Historic Landmarks in Michigan/archive1 have been addressed. Would you mind returning to see if you have further comments? Thank you, Dana boomer (talk) 18:49, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Dana, thanks for the reminder, and sorry I've been on wikibreak for the last few weeks. I'm really pleased with how you and TRM have worked together to improve the accessibility of the article, and I'm sure that visually-impaired visitors will have a much better experience there as a result. I've added a note of my support to the FLC. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 19:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Faryl at WP:FAC
Hi RexxS. In my "spare time" I'm going through FACs trying to ensure that any ACCESS and technical issues that are commonplace at FLC are noted. I was wondering what you felt about the "track listing" table in the subject article? I'm not asking you to comment on the FAC unless you're happy to do so, but I see a number of albums at FAC and wanted to get some good advice on how their templates align with ACCESS. Hope you're well, all the best, The Rambling Man (talk) 17:34, 22 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi TRM. Sorry I've been away from editing for a short while. You're absolutely right to raise those concerns, and I've left a couple of comments at the WP:Featured article candidates/Faryl/archive1. Unfortunately it will require modifications to the tracklist template to update it to our current standards, and I'm wary about alienating the regulars at FAC because of perceptions of "accessibility hurdles" that take time to adjust to - you know that better than I do! It is worth regularly reminding folks, though, that the visually-impaired in particular can benefit from incorporating accessibility best practice. Keep up the great work! --RexxS (talk) 19:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi RexxS, no worries, hope you're well. Thanks for taking the time out to check the table, I'm doing what I can at FLC (we seem quite good at most access issues there now!) and suddenly noted the plethora of FACs that pass with tables, lists etc that all need work in that area.  Also, thanks for revisiting the Michigan FLC, once we got past that tricky coding thing, it all went swimmingly!  Cheers for now (and expect more pleas in due course!!)  The Rambling Man (talk) 19:44, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Just a note
I really enjoyed talking with you today, and all the others whose Wikipedia names I will inevitably forget, so apologies to them, but my memory for names is frankly crap. I was made to feel really welcome, something I didn't expect. Malleus Fatuorum 20:59, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * It was a real pleasure chatting with you (and Iridescent – two of my five heroes in one day!).
 * I can confirm to any talk-page watchers that Malleus is even more entertaining in real life than on wiki, as well as being simultaneously jovial and thoughtful – a rare combination indeed.
 * Malleus, I look forward immensely to meeting you again soon. If I could somehow arrange to meet up with Bishonen, Giano and Geogre, that would the gig of a lifetime. Back to reality, see if you can persuade Parrot to make a meeting – we're plotting to arrange a wikimeet somewhere in the Nottingham – Sheffield – Leeds triangle in the near future if that's any more convenient for him. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 19:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Pictures of aquatic life
Hey Rexx Just finished a week of diving in Zanzibar and got some great pictures. Are these sorts of images needed on Wikipedia do you know? I am not sure the official names of everything I say. -- Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 10:22, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I hope you had a really great time, James. Do upload them to Commons if you're happy to release them under CC 3.0. There are other editors who will identify species, so don't worry about that, and you can always drop a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Fishes or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Tree of Life to let them know.
 * By the way, I spoke to Sharkli at the recent Coventry meetup and I'm looking forward to meeting you in Coventry at the end of August! --RexxS (talk) 17:30, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Great should be fun. Any good diving around your area? -- Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 04:55, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No. Just a couple of cold, murky quarries that we use for training. All the real diving takes place at the coast. Coincidentally, Coventry is generally reckoned to be the place in the UK furthest from any coast. --RexxS (talk) 18:34, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

MonmouthpediA
Brilliant. See you at the board meeting. Anyone is welcome at our meetings. Also you offered help with MonmouthpediA .... we can use all the help we can muster. This is going to be an amazingly important project.... but we have set high targets and help is important now - I'll email. Victuallers (talk) 10:35, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

But anyone reading this..... Monmouthpedia is going to be very exciting. Get involved (cos your mum is going to read about it).

row scopes
Hi Rexx, got a quick question about rowscopes. Nebula Award for Best Novel is currently at FLC here. The user has included the row scopes but he has used colour to obscure the shading of the column that occurs when they are used. Was wondering if this ok and if it has any effect on the accessibility of the table, cheers. NapHit (talk) 22:43, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No, it won't affect the accessibility for screen readers, etc. in the slightest. They would never see those colours anyway, and all of the information in the table is available in text or by accessible symbols. What PresN has done is to disguise the row headers to look like normal data cells, in a similar way to what "plainrowheaders" does, but resetting the background colour as well. It's a lot of effort for a merely decorative visual effect, but that doesn't matter much if it means we get accessible tables without alienating those who set such great store in appearances.
 * More importantly, I should say that for a screen reader, the best row header would of course be the title of the novel, as the year doesn't uniquely identify which row the reader is on - and that's the whole point of bothering to mark up row headers. Oh well, hope that helps, --RexxS (talk) 23:06, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks for your input Rexx, much appreciated. NapHit (talk) 11:34, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
HI, Rexx; all done except for the thanks. Take care.

Buck 12:31, 28 March 2012 (UTC) 

Category:Wikipedians who wish Bish and Giano would come back
Category:Wikipedians who wish Bish and Giano would come back, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Pichpich (talk) 14:53, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Chart advice
I had a question about formatting a table, and you were recommended as someone with expertise in that area. I'm trying to work List of Presidents of the United States up to FL, but my chart/table skills are limited. The draft is in my sandbox, here. The problem is in the Vice President column. A few rows from the top, you'll see George Clinton. I wanted to extend his cell down into the next row, but adding to the "rowspan" parameter doesn't do anything. I'd be grateful for any tips you might have. Thanks, Coemgenus (talk) 11:22, 2 April 2012 (UTC).
 * Hi, Coemgenus, I hope you don't mind, but as it's easier to show than to explain, I've made the change to make George Clinton span another row. You'll see that because of the number of rowspans in the following presidency, it gets 'compressed' so that it hardly appears to overlap into Madison's presidency. That's an unfortunate consequence of the way that browsers are free to interpret multiple row spans. Madison's presidency occupies 5 rows in the table and it's really not practical to attempt to force heights onto the rows, so it's difficult to improve on what you see now, particularly when different browsers and screen sizes come into consideration. I'm going to mock up those two presidencies in my sandbox and play around to see if I can better results without risking edit conflicts in your sandbox.
 * If you're going for FL, then the table needs row & column headers marked up and scoped for accessibility (as in WP:DTAB), so I've done that for you, in case you were not familiar with the technique.
 * Here are the the diffs of my edits so you can see what I did each time:
 * Please revert any or all of those that you don't want - or if you leave them, I donate those edits into the public domain, so you don't need to attribute me when updating the main article. I'll report back if I make any progress with those rowspans. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 16:09, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Rexx, that's exactly what I wanted to do. I didn't know about that scope business before, but it seems to be what I was missing.  I appreciate the help!  I'll let you know when I'm getting near to submitting it for FL, after those other changes you mentioned.  Thanks again, Coemgenus (talk) 16:32, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok - I finally managed to re-construct the two presidencies so that Clinton spans as far as the end of the 6th term (1808 election). Of course, Madison's presidency now takes up rather more height (with 3 VPs during his second term), but that's what we'd expect. Nevertheless, I suspect that when TK adds the events to each presidency they will 'fatten up' anyway so that Madison won't look so different. Anyway, feel free to use it or not, depending on which you prefer. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 17:50, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that change looks better, but is less accurate -- the first vacancy was at the end of Madison's first term. I'm going to keep it, for now, though, and I did the same for Calhoun's vice-presidency, which also spanned two presidencies.  Thanks again, it was driving me crazy trying to figure out how to make it work. --Coemgenus (talk)
 * Thanks, Rexx, that's exactly what I wanted to do. I didn't know about that scope business before, but it seems to be what I was missing.  I appreciate the help!  I'll let you know when I'm getting near to submitting it for FL, after those other changes you mentioned.  Thanks again, Coemgenus (talk) 16:32, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok - I finally managed to re-construct the two presidencies so that Clinton spans as far as the end of the 6th term (1808 election). Of course, Madison's presidency now takes up rather more height (with 3 VPs during his second term), but that's what we'd expect. Nevertheless, I suspect that when TK adds the events to each presidency they will 'fatten up' anyway so that Madison won't look so different. Anyway, feel free to use it or not, depending on which you prefer. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 17:50, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that change looks better, but is less accurate -- the first vacancy was at the end of Madison's first term. I'm going to keep it, for now, though, and I did the same for Calhoun's vice-presidency, which also spanned two presidencies.  Thanks again, it was driving me crazy trying to figure out how to make it work. --Coemgenus (talk)

Some advice
RexxS, thank you for your help; it's greatly appreciated. Now, I have another question for you, well outside of the scope of Malleus's talk page. You're a scuba diver, and I have a swimming pool, not to mention a more exciting body of water nearby, in which I like to dive a bit. What brand/kind of diving mask would you recommend? I am probably not going snorkeling (I'm too phobic for that breathing stick and am terrified of breathing in water) and this is purely recreational. My chances of getting attacked by sharks are as close to zero as one can get. I need something that seals well and is affordable. Thanks! 207.157.121.92 (talk) 20:00, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * As diving masks all perform the same function, I really have no preference for brand. All you need is one that seals well enough not to leak (which forces you to keep on clearing the water out). If you go to a reputable dive shop and tell them what you want to do, any decent member of staff will allow you to try on masks until you find one that you're comfortable with. The trick is to move the strap out of the way and place the mask on your face covering your eyes and nose, then breathe in through your nose and hold the breath for a few seconds - if the mask seals properly then it will stay on your face without your hand or the strap to hold it there. You should buy a mask with toughened or tempered glass - in case it ever gets hit and breaks, you don't want slivers of glass going into your eye - but all modern masks have that kind of safety glass in them. Price can be anything from $30 up, but there's little to be gained from paying lots. The exception is for old folks like me who need some magnification to see instruments properly, and I pay a bit more for having magnifying lenses in place of plain glass. Here's a typical online shop offering prescriptions should you need them (it's in GBP because I'm in the UK).
 * I envy your location, having dived the Gulf just once, so I'll send my regards to you from the chilly West Midlands, 5 C today. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 23:14, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! After I dropped this note here, I remembered that I have a Facebook friend, and he said the exact same thing (about straps and breath and whatnot). I was going to buy something online, but now I see I should get something at a real-life store where I can try them. Feel free to come by; it's about three, four hours to the Gulf. Our pool is at 76 F today; I think the Gulf is already warmer than that... Thanks, 207.157.121.92 (talk) 23:28, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Red cat to blue cat
I was slightly afraid of this when I linked to it. I fear that by bluelinking that category, you will soon bring the hounds of hell down upon it. When it was redlinked, it wasn't really a category, and no one could complain.

And yes, I wish Geogre would come back too. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:41, 6 March 2012 (UTC)


 * To further explain, because I probably wasn't clear: I have seen CFD's on user categories before, where once it was voted to be deleted, users were forced, on threat of blocking, to remove the redlinked category from their user page as well. In other words, if it gets CFD'd, I can't go back to the way it was. --Floquenbeam (talk) 22:44, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, I seem to spend enough of my time defending little personal things that are important to me that I reckon I'm up for defending the odd category. In any case, there's no point in being half-hearted about it – I want to see all Wikipedians in that category and a good fight would be great publicity. If we could just tell Bish and Giano how much they are appreciated, it might just be enough to coax them back. I live in hope. --RexxS (talk) 22:52, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * T-RexxS no Bishzilla, but T-RexxS good anyway. Hell hounds bad.  OK, me wait, see what happen. --Floquenstein&#39;s monster (talk) 23:28, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I was right about CFD, you appear to have been right about publicity (now up to 10 people). Prognosticators without equal, we are. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:37, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Bish and Giano aren't universally appreciated, as you obviously know, but they are by most editors who don't keep their heads down the toilets of AN/I and its ilk. As for categories though, I've always thought them to be almost Stone Age and have never bothered with them. Malleus Fatuorum 23:01, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hehe. 15 now. Can't grumble. --RexxS (talk) 18:13, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
 * When I saw this section header, I thought y'all had got yourselves some CB radios! Red Cat to Blue Cat! I'm gonna drop the hammer down! Watch out for smokeys! -- Dianna (talk) 18:30, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Passion
Did you know that I translated the structure of Bach's St Matthew Passion from de. A friend referred me to you as the best in tables. It will be on the Main page soon. - I wrote He was despised last year, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:34, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * That's a beautiful article. I hope you don't mind, I've tweaked the table very slightly (nothing much that is visible) but it should improve the accessibility a little, and I've taken the opportunity to replace old-fashioned cell attributes for centring with the more modern css styling, as that's one more job that won't need to be done at some point in the future. Best regards, --RexxS (talk) 20:48, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I first looked for your changes the wrong place, St. Matthew Passion, then found them in Messiah, sorry for the confusion. If you have time, I would appreciate a look at the other also. (Needless to say, there's also Messiah structure, Part I and Part III. I don't have time right now but could probably handle those following the example.) I wrote He was despised missing a friend. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:04, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I've straightened out the colspans in St Matthew Passion structure and I was able to set the appropriate column scope for each part. However, I simply don't understand the colours as I can't fit them to a textual description. Part of the problem is things like this:
 * "Soliloquents are Judas (B), Peter (B), two witnesses (A T), two high priests (B), two maids (S), Pilate (B), his wife (S)."
 * as I don't understand the (B), (A), etc. Are they baritone, alto, etc? or a key to something else? How do they relate to "Chorale S" or "Rec A"?
 * Just imagine for a moment that you are blind, but have a device that can read web pages to you. If that device read the introduction and then the table to you, would you be able to tell which parts are Gospel, which Recitative, and so on? Normally, either the text of the table or some sort of key like † can be used to give the information to blind visitors, but the structure looks so complex that I wouldn't know how to advise you in this case. If you can explain some of the above to me, I'd be happy to see what can be done to make sure that our visually impaired readers don't get left out. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 21:47, 6 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Let's see what I can do this late (my end of the world), can continue tomorrow. Thanks for noticing that I failed to switch the NBA-BWV in Part II, the German has it the other way round, but I consulted Michael Bednarek about this, about the colours also Graham87 (who is blind), both responded on my talk (link above).
 * "The choirs are abbreviated Ch I and Ch II, individual voice parts as S (soprano), A (alto), T (tenor) and B (bass). Both choirs are four-part, SATB." This precedes the line on the soliloquents. The soliloquents are within the Gospel narration, they do not need to be distinguished. Different colours were used by the German author for the comments of individual singers on text by Picander (two colours, recitatives and arias), comments in free chorus on text by Picander (blue), and chorales (red). There are hybrid forms such as a chorale sung in interaction with a recitative. Compared to the German version, I inserted the column "Gospel", everything in that column (with the one exception of the chorale in the opening chorus) is on Gospel text. - Next year I will probably add on individual movements, as for Messiah, - but for this year, I will have to translate an Easter cantata to German ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:08, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * The cantata is in my Spielwiese (meadow to play on - equivalent to sandbox). I realized there is one more list, translated from the same editor, with background colours, that one is sortable. - Would you follow me here? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:38, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok - I've looked harder. I'm obviously not 100% right now as I missed the text description explaining the S A T B. I think I can relate each use of colour to a piece of text, so it passes the accessibility test of not conveying information solely by colour. The same applies to List of Bach cantatas, and you can see how many extra columns there are in that list to convey the other information. If you are interested in making your tables sortable, I'll have a look at what would be sensible for that as well. --RexxS (talk) 19:28, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! For looking harder, for the offer (but the pieces are composed as a sequence, don't need to be sortable) and most of all for the line "I'll just remind folks that ArbCom fiat does not make policy, the community does." Happy Easter (see my user for more, the Passion is now hidden), --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:49, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Precious

 * The Passion table is now in decent black and white. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:21, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
 * First miracle, top of my talk, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:49, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * That is good news indeed. Thank you. --RexxS (talk) 15:41, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Continued: on this day his Easter egg tree and my Bach cantata mentioning an approach for peace are featured together on the Main page, enjoy! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:41, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

List of diving hazards and precautions
Hi RexxS, I would appreciate your input on some changes I am considering for the format and possibly name of this article. Cheers, Peter (Southwood) (talk): 10:16, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I've made a few comments, Peter, and I'm sorry to be so negative, but that article is a real disaster and the thing it desperately needs is sources. I'm very happy though that you want to clean it up, so please don't let me put you off. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 15:44, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Monmouth meet-up
Sorry to bother you, but I'm really hesitant as to whether to attend tomorrow as it's quite unclear exactly what is happening and when and who should be involved in what. I can't attend in the evening in any case - what time would you expect "ordinary" wikipedians to turn up - is it 12 noon or 1pm? And how does the "meet-up" part of it work? Deb (talk) 13:59, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Replied at User talk:Deb. --RexxS (talk) 16:35, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

60th
I am sorry to have missed the bash, but I'll drink to your good health and longevity when I am allowed to drink again. I've seen - "undisputed", it says on the wall. Is that a first for Wikipedia? - Sitush (talk) 21:18, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Si, and I hope your alcohol allowance is raised again soon. We had to look up what the word "undisputed" means, and it turns out you're right. The meeting place was a huge success, by the way, and we had a part of the pub to ourselves. Looking forward to seeing you soon. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 00:19, 29 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The irony, of course, is that that particular fight (Holyfield–Lewis March '99) is arguably the most disputed result in boxing history. Black Sheep (talk) 14:43, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Doom Bar
Hey RexxS. If you cast you mind back a few months to a dingy pub in Liverpool, I mentioned an article on Doom Bar, which I hoped one day to get to featured status. I also mentioned my trepidation of the process and you very kindly offered to have a look over the article, to give it a copyedit. Ok.. well, it has only taken me 6 months to get round to actually fiddling with the damn thing, but I'm much happier with how it looks. I was wondering if you might give look over it as and when you have the opportunity and give me any suggestions? I am hoping to find someone else to do a copyedit too along with a peer review before I approach FAC, I want to have all my bases covered! Thanks in advance  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 11:07, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hey WTT, good to hear from you again; you've missed some great meetups, but I guess you've been busy. Anyway, I'm really pleased that you're getting stuck into Doom Bar, and I'd be happy to do anything I can to help out. A quick glance shows the article is interesting and well-structured with a decent number of references, so you're well on the way. I'll do a copyedit when I can make some time in the next few days, and also do reference and accessibility check for you. I can see immediately that the two lead images have alt text, but none of the others do. You could improve the accessibility if you can add brief alt text (which would fit in with, but not duplicate the caption) for the others. It's not compulsory for FA, but is worth doing anyway. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 23:00, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I know, I know. I feel gutted to have missed them, however having recently bought a house to do up, most of my weekends are full. I will make sure I wander over to Manchester or Liverpool as soon as I can. I'll get the alt text done for the images today, I'm normally pretty good with accessibility (it does come under my job description!) but for some reason image alts just didn't click. There's a few sentences/topics in there that I'm not 100% certain should be and it may be that a different organisational structure would be better, so if you've got any suggestions please do shout. Thanks again!  WormTT   &middot; &#32;(talk) 07:28, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I see that Demiurge is going to do a copyedit for you; that's good. I've modified Template:Infobox UK feature to improve its accessibility, and I've asked Plastikspork to help sort out the related issue at Template:Location map, which is fully protected. A quick check of sources shows no problems, but I'll do a more thorough check before you go to FAC. --RexxS (talk) 16:29, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Query
What are you doing, RexxS? You suddenly appear out of nowhere, and your comments are at least in part off-topic. Why are you getting involved? Is it not possible to agree to disagree? I disagree with a number of your table preferences, but I have not bothered you about that, have I? Gimmetoo (talk) 06:01, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * We had this discussion on Ursula Andress, remember? I eventually gave way and decided it wasn't worth the argument about you forcing your personal preferences onto the article's dates. But when you try to change the guidelines to legitimise your way of doing things at the expense of common sense, I'm going to speak up. Your interactions with John - an editor I respect - have followed the pattern you have displayed every time I've seen you interact with others. Surely you can find it in yourself to debate issues without personalising them? For what it's worth, I'd be happy to discuss your disagreements with my take on tables, as long as we don't have a re-run of the hyphen/sorting debacle, where I have to guess at what your point is. --RexxS (talk) 18:40, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * And as long as we don't have you calling my statements "patently untrue", when they were correct? Ok, RexxS, I invite you to discuss on my talk page about whatever. Given the comment below, I won't reply here further. Gimmetoo (talk) 22:05, 7 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Wow, I just read Talk:Ursula Andress and saw your 2010 interaction with Gimmetoo. So he has been doing this for years, then. It's hard for me to understand why someone would get such a majorly disruptive bee in their bonnet over such an apparently minor thing. Thank you for the nice comment above also. Take care, --John (talk) 11:46, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

List of space stations
Hi, RexxS!

Sorry about the abrupt contact, but your name was brought up by User:The Rambling Man on this list's featured list candidate page.

I was wondering if you could check this page for WP:ACCESS issues, per The Rambling Man's suggestion. I've tried to fix it up best I could by reading MOS:DTT, but I can't actually check to see if my fixes worked.

Thanks in advance ~ Matthewrbowker Talk to me 01:49, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Hi Matthew, there's no problem asking me here. I'm sorry I've not responded sooner, but I've spent the last two days in Monmouth working to get Monmouthpedia ready for the weekend launch! I've just had a quick look at the article and the FLC - I'll spend some time tomorrow on anything that can improve the accessibility for you. Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 23:02, 16 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Update: I've done the De-orbited space stations table as best as I can, and I've tried to do it in steps with edit summaries that you can follow. Do you want to try the other tables yourself (and I'll check them afterwards for you), or would you like me to do them as well for you (won't be until tomorrow)? Cheers, --RexxS (talk) 18:13, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Excellent, thanks for breaking that down! It makes a whole lot of sense when you do it step by step.


 * I gave the other tables a shot, I hope I've done it correctly. If you could please check it over, I'm afraid I've missed something.


 * Thank you so much for doing this. ~ Matthewrbowker Talk to me 18:56, 18 May 2012 (UTC)


 * RexxS, as ever, my thanks. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:38, 18 May 2012 (UTC)